Lords of the Ascendancy: the Irish House of Lords and its members 1600-1800, F.G. James (Irish Academic Press, Dublin and The Catholic University of America Press, Washington £27.50)

In view of the centrality of parliament to the history and historiography of the Ireland of the ‘Protestant ascendancy’, it is surprising that there is no modern study to compare with P.D.G. Thomas’s forensically detailed reconstruction of the operation of the British House of Commons in the eighteenth century for either house of the Irish legislature. Edith Johnston and J.L. McCracken have published useful accounts of the representative system in the eighteenth century, and a numbers of suggestive short studies of aspects of the proceedings of parliament have been published over the years by the likes of J.C.Beckett, A.G. Donaldson, Dermot Engerfield and John Bergin. However, nothing approaching a full-length study of the legislature has yet seen print. For this reason, the appearance of this elegantly produced study of the House of Lords and its members is to be welcomed. F.G. James has assembled a large volume of statistical and qualitative evidence from which the student and general reader will glean much if their primary concern is the personnel of the Irish House of Lords in the eighteenth century. On the negative side, those looking for a detailed reconstruction of the rules, procedures and operation of the House and of the Irish peerage, which supplied the body of its membership, will be disappointed because while what is provided in chapter five is more complete than available elsewhere, it takes second place to the author’s preoccupation with the ethnic composition of the Irish peerage.

James’ concern with the composition of the peerage is registered in his opening paragraph when he takes issue with W.E.H. Lecky’s claim that the body of the Irish landholding elite in the eighteenth century were the descendants of Cromwellians who had profited from the draconian land transfer effected in the 1650s. In order to disprove this (which, by the way, he does thoroughly) the author commences with an exploration of the history of the Irish peerage and the Irish House of Lords in the middle ages. This is an utterly defensible course, but unfortunately too much of the material adduced in the opening chapter is not central to the subject of the book. More pertinently, it occupies space that would have been more profitably utilised providing a comprehensive review of the literature on the origins and early history of both the peerage and the Lords.

What emerges from the narrative offered is that the Irish peerage remained small and the House of Lords relatively inconsequential until the early seventeenth century when James I and Charles I made an unprecedented eighty-five creations. Since the bulk of these were English, the effect was less dramatic than the figures suggest, and certainly less consequential than the eclipse of the native Irish and, to a lesser extent, of the Old English in the Lords. James expresses himself surprised at the continuing Old English and, though it was much smaller, native Irish presence. He provides a useful statistical perspective on this by analysing the ethnic origins of the peers who attended the parliaments convened in Ireland in the seventeenth century. His account would be more complete and more convincing if it was complemented by a fuller analysis of the emergence of an aristocratic identity (to which he makes reference) in the late seventeenth century, as both the Old English and Irish families that embraced Protestantism intermarried with the New English and became increasingly indistinguishable. This renders James’ continued use of the designations ‘Old’ and ‘New English’ anachronistic, but such is his preoccupation with ethnicity that he continues to use them. The problem is compounded by the fact that, as with his exploration of the medieval background, his exposition of developments in the seventeenth century is too dependant on a traditional political narrative and vignettes of the experiences of individual peers to be entirely satisfying. He is more assured and pertinent when he comes to the role of the House of Lords in the eighteenth century. This is the period in which James has specialised in his previously published work, and this is where the book is at its most rewarding.

It commences with a useful account of the role of the House of Lords in the enactment of the Penal Laws and its stand on the fraught subject of its appellate jurisdiction. This provides James with an opportunity to define what he describes as ‘the character of the ascendancy’, and if the main issues are both well-traversed and well-known, the account of the operation of the House of Lords that follows is not. Chapter five provides the fullest statement available of the operation of the sittings, attendance, committee system, voting, bill procedures and legislation initiated in that House. It could have been amplified by the use of such sources as the Lords debates for 1783-4 in volume three of The Parliamentary Register, but it is a fine reminder of how significant and how under-utilised a source the journals of the Irish Lords are.

The Lord’s Journal is less central to the dissection of the Irish peerage offered in the four chapters that follow. This follows a largely traditional approach, but the accounts of absenteeism in all its guises (Jacobite, religious, economic), the increasing endogamy of aristocratic marriage patterns, aristocratic incomes, the role of political service in the award of peerages and the attempts to measure the influence of the Lords on the Commons offer important insights. There is, it is true, much with which many will be familiar, but it is enlivened with pertinent anecdote. What is less satisfactory is the chapter on ‘the Lords spiritual’. This is really little more than a general history of the role of the Church of Ireland bishops in eighteenth-century Irish society on which James has already published extensively. Most culpably, he makes no attempt is made to explore the career of Charles Agar, the most formidable clerical politician of the late eighteenth century. This is disappointing, and so too is the largely formless concluding chapter, which is a pity because there is much in the book, and particularly in those chapters dealing with the eighteenth century, that can be read with profit.

James Kelly lectures in history at St Patrick’s College, Drumcondra.

'

That field of glory. The story of Clontarf, from battleground to garden suburb Read More

Darkest Dublin: The story of the Church Street disaster and a pictorial account of the slums of Dublin in 1913Read More

Personal Histories

Personal Histories is an initiative by History Ireland,
which aims to capture the individual histories of Irish
people both in Ireland and around the world. It is hoped
to build an extensive database reflecting Irish lives,
giving them a chance to be heard, remembered and to
add their voice to the historical record.
Click Here to go to the Personal Histories page

On this Day

1981 Sir Norman Stronge, former speaker of the Stormont parliament, and his son James were shot dead by the Provisional IRA at their home, Tynan Abbey, close to the Armagh/Monaghan border.

1933 George Moore (80), author, notably of Esther Waters (1894), and leading light in the Irish Literary Revival, died.

1924 Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (53), communist revolutionary and premier of the Soviet Union since 1922, died of a stroke.

1922 The Craig–Collins agreement promised an end to the ‘Belfast Boycott’—the ban on northern goods coming into the South—in return for Catholics intimidated out of the Belfast shipyards being allowed to return.

1919 The first Dáil Éireann convened at the Mansion House, Dublin.

Above: Scene from the Battle of Isandlwana, 22 January 1879, the British Army’s heaviest military defeat by the Zulus. (Maynooth University Library)

1879(Jan.21–23)The Battle of Isandlwana/Rorke’s Drift. For many, the six-month Zulu War, prompted by the invasion of King Cetshwayo’s independent kingdom by British colonial forces under Lord Chelmsford, is viewed through the prism of the 1964 movie Zulu, which portrayed, with considerable artistic licence, the epic defence of a mission station—named after Irishman James Rorke, who had a trading store there— by c. 100 British troops (including a dozen or so Irishmen) against c. 3,000 Zulus. Thanks to Chelmsford, this strategically insignificant engagement was widely publicised. The bravery and self-sacrifice of the plucky Brits was applauded—no mention was made, of course, of their execution of c. 500 Zulu prisoners—and no less than eleven VCs were awarded (in contrast with one VC each for the 1944 D-Day landings and the entire Battle of Britain). All of this was designed by Chelmsford to distract British public attention from what had preceded it: the crushing defeat of his army at Isandlwana, with the loss of over 1,300 of his men, including many Irishmen, by the main c. 20,000-strong Zulu army, armed with spears and shields. While British gallantry was duly extolled (such as the heroic last stand of County Leitrim’s Col. Anthony Durnford and the valiant but fatal effort by Dubliner Lt. Nevill Coghill to retrieve his regiment’s colours), her historians are still trying to explain the defeat. Causes include the lack of screwdrivers to loosen the screws on the ammunition boxes. From a Zulu perspective, Isandlwana was a glorious victory—but a pyrrhic one. Cetshwayo knew that the British would regroup and re-invade, which they did. Superior numbers and technology prevailed, and by July, after six more battles, Zululand was entirely subjugated.